This said...this is not the first time that happens. Usually, the mention the text is gfdl is there.

But usually as well, there is no mention of Wikipedia, no mention of any author, no link to wikipedia itself, no link to the article or to the article history.

In short, the text is considered public domain, since there is no respect for who wrote it. So...that is nice, since the text is being used by others. But our project is not gaining anything. No reputation as it is not considered the origin of the text, and no new contributors, since there are no links.

Each time I raise the topic on fr, a contributor answers that no where in the license is it written that wikipedia name itself should be mentionned. And that the projet itself could disappear, hence making disappear the names of the contributions. So that it is not worth it to ask for a link to be put back to wikipedia itself

Conclusions are that the names of the contributors themselves only should be mentionned (on the site using the content - which is totally impracticable), or that we should ask a link to the history of the article (which is imho, bound to let many readers of the site in question quite abashed and wondering what is that stuff about).

Consequently, no one is doing anything, and sites are beginning to use our content without any recognition of our rights.

This is ***seriously*** beginning to bug me.

Anthere a écrit:

Anthere a écrit:

...

Could someone give us a link to a draft page of emails to send to someone using wikipedia content without respecting the terms of the licence ?

I saw several times great emails examples published on the list (the last one was really good). Does someone know the link ? Or is there somewhere a page from which we can inspire ourselves to make a standard copyright violation notice ?

Thanks

Thanks Mav and Mark. I copied the english version, and lauched a campaign of collaborative translation/adaptation on fr: :-)